Re: [asa] Dawkins is at it again

Hi Mike,

Thanks for taking my remarks in the spirit intended. :)

I've not personally had any experience with people tortured by the idea of hell but I imagine that if I did, then your remarks about deeper issues from the past would prove to be quite in order. Certainly, one would have to have REASONS (not necessarily of the rational sort) to fear such condemnation - whether that be a "real" cause like actual moral badness in oneself (although I wonder whether truly bad people worry much about hell?) or a "conceptual" problem like either very poor self-image OR a very poor understanding of divine grace (and therefore of divine judgment). In part I'm thinking here that people who DO really see themselves as sinners, probably have little cause to fear even if they do sense their inadequacy more than the "good" (cf. Parable of the tax-collector and the Pharisee - Luke 18:9-14).

It occurs to me, however, that the very fact that I haven't much experience of this sort of thing DESPITE living within a religious community of the sort Dawkins seeks to critique really serves to rob Dawkins' objection of it strength. I know, for a bona fide fact, that none of the children of families in my congregation lie awake at night worrying about hell-fire and damnation! So, again, Dawkins is really dealing with straw men of the most improbable variety and if there IS such a thing as religious "child abuse" of the sort Dawkins espouses, I've yet to personally see an instance.

It also occurred to me, being a bit preoccupied with thoughts of Martin Luther in the context of the discussion on the sacraments, that in Luther we have a prime example of a soul tortured by thoughts of an angry God BUT, unfortunately for Dawkins, found it was the Gospel of Christ and not Atheism which brought peace to his soul. So, again, Dawkins polemical program leads him to overlook the obvious: the vast majority of Christians see their faith as the SOLUTION to the "problem" of human weakness / divine judgment. Any fear of condemnation is thus eliminated rather than bolstered by Christian religious belief (cf. Heb 2:14,15).

Blessings,
Murray

Nucacids wrote:
> Hi Murray,
>
>> Just a wee comment on the below - which I hope doesn't come across as
>> too negative;
>>
>> As a matter of rhetorical strategy (and of pastoral concern!) I'd
>> suggest not going down the path of questioning the substance of the
>> >woman's account, nor asserting that Dawkins accepts it "on blind faith."
>
> Wise advice. Yes, the main issue is not questioning the valdity of the
> anecdotes, but in noting that Dawkins has only anecdotes when the
> science does not support him. This is inexcusable for someone whose
> public image is built upon science advocacy. Let's also keep in mind
> that Dawkins speaks as an amateur when it comes to the topic of child
> abuse (and it shows).
>
> My tangential point about the story is based on knowing and reading
> people. If someone tells me the concept of hell is torturing them, 9/10
> times, there is something deeper and darker from the past that is
> torturing them.
>
> Mike

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Thu Nov 6 22:54:37 2008